Loading...

Financial Services Regulations: A look back and a look ahead

by Kerry Rivera 4 min read November 3, 2016

financial-services-regulatory

It’s been a wild ride for the financial services industry over the past eight years. After the mortgage meltdown, the Great Recession and a stagnant economy … well, one could say the country had seen better days.

Did you watch The Big Short last winter? It all came crumbling down.

And then President Barack Obama entered the scene. Change was needed. More oversight introduced. Suddenly, we had the Affordable Care Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act and the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Taxes were raised on the country’s highest earners for the first time since the late-1990s. In essence, the pendulum swung hard and fast to a new era of tightened and rigorous regulation.

Fast forward to present day and we find ourselves on the cusp of transitioning to new leadership for the country. A new president, new cabinet, new leaders in Congress.

What will it all mean for financial services regulations?

It’s helpful to initially take a look back at the key regulations that have been introduced over the past eight years.

Mortgage Reform: Long gone are the days of obtaining a quick mortgage.  New rules have required loan originators to verify and document the consumer’s income and assets, including employment status (if relied upon), existing debt obligations, mortgage-related obligations, alimony and child support. The CFPB has also expanded foreclosure protections for struggling borrowers and homeowners. Maintaining the health of the mortgage industry is important for the entire country, and updated rules have enhanced the safety and transparency of the mortgage market. Home values have largely recovered from the darkest days, but some question whether the underwriting criteria have become too strict.

Combatting Fraud: The latest cyber-attack trends and threats come fast and furious. Thus, regulators are largely addressing the challenge by expecting banks to adhere to world-class standards from organizations such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) implemented the Red Flags Rule in November 2008. It requires institutions to establish policies and procedures to identify and recognize red flags — i.e., patterns, practices or specific activities that indicate the possible existence of identity theft — that occur during account-opening activities, existing account maintenance and new activity on an account that has been inactive for two or more years.

Loss Forecasting: The Dodd-Frank Act Requires the Federal Reserve to conduct an annual stress test of bank holding companies (BHCs), savings and loan holding companies, state member banks, and nonbank financial institutions. In October 2012, the Fed Board adopted the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) rules. This requires banks with assets of $50 billion or more to submit to an annual review centered on a supervisory stress test to gauge capital adequacy. In January 2016, Dodd-Frank Act Stress Testing (DFAST) was introduced, requiring bank holding companies with assets of $10 billion or more to conduct separate annual stress tests known as “company-run tests” using economic scenarios. Every year regulators expect to see continued improvement in stress-testing models and capital-planning approaches as they raise the bar on what constitutes an acceptable practice.

CFPB: No longer the new kids on the block, the CFPB has transitioned to an entity that has its tentacles into every aspect of consumer financial products. Mortgage lending was one of their first pursuits, but they have since dug into “ability-to-pay underwriting” and servicing standards for auto loans, credit cards and add-on products sold through third-party vendors. Now they are looking into will likely be the next “bubble,” – student lending – and educating themselves about online marketplace lending.

Data Quality: Expectations related to data quality, risk analytics, and regulatory reporting have risen dramatically since the financial downturn. Inaccuracy in data is costly and harmful, slows down the industry, and creates frustration. In short, it’s bad for consumers and the industry. It’s no secret that financial institutions rely on the accuracy of credit data to make the most informed decisions about the creditworthiness of their customers. With intense scrutiny in this area, many financial institutions have created robust teams to handle and manage requirements and implement sound policies surrounding data accuracy.

This is merely a sliver of the multiple regulations introduced and strengthened over the past eight years. Is there a belief that the regulatory pendulum might take a swing to other side with new leadership? Unlikely. The agenda for 2017 largely centers on the need to improve debt collections practices, enhance access to credit for struggling Americans, and the need for ongoing monitoring of the fintech space.

Only time will tell, but one thing is certain. Anyone involved in financial services needs to keep a watchful eye on the ever-evolving world of regulation and Washington.

Related Posts

  Experian Verify is redefining how lenders streamline income and employment verification; a value clearly reflected in Marcus Bondraeger’s experience at Freedom Mortgage. With access to the second-largest instant payroll network in the U.S., Experian Verify  connects lenders to millions of unique employer records, including those sourced through Experian Employer Services clients, delivering instant results at scale. This reach enables lenders to reduce manual processes, accelerate loan decisions and enhance the borrower experience from the very first touchpoint. Unlike traditional verification providers, Experian Verify offers transparent, value-driven pricing: it charges only when a consumer is successfully verified, not simply when an employer record is found. As lenders navigate increasing compliance requirements and secondary market expectations, they can also rely on Experian Verify’s FCRA-compliant framework, fully supporting both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Combined with Experian’s industry-leading data governance and quality standards, lenders gain a verification partner they can trust for accuracy, security, and long-term operational efficiency. Perhaps most importantly, Experian Verify delivers 100% U.S. workforce coverage through its flexible, automated waterfall: instant verification, consumer-permissioned verification, and research verification. This multilayered approach ensures lenders meet every borrower where they are, whether they’re connected to a large payroll provider, a smaller employer, or require additional document-based validation. As Marcus highlights in the video, this comprehensive and configurable design empowers lenders to build verification workflows that truly fit their business needs while enhancing speed, completeness, and borrower satisfaction. Explore Experian Verify

by Ted Wentzel 4 min read February 20, 2026

Fraud is evolving faster than ever, driven by digitalization, real-time payments and increasingly sophisticated scams. For Warren Jones and his team at Santander Bank, staying ahead requires more than tools. It requires the right partner. The partnership with Santander Bank began nearly a decade ago, during a period of rapid change in the fraud and banking landscape. Since then, the relationship has grown into a long-term collaboration focused on continuous improvement and innovation. Experian products helped Santander address one of its most pressing operational challenges: a high-volume manual review queue for new account applications. While the vast majority of alerts in the queue were fraudulent and ultimately declined, a small percentage represented legitimate customers whose account openings were delayed. This created inefficiencies for staff and a poor first impression of genuine applicants. We worked alongside Santander to tackle this challenge head-on, transforming how applications were reviewed, how fraud was detected and how legitimate customers were approved. In addition to fraud prevention, implementing Experian's Ascend PlatformTM, with its intuitive user experience and robust data environment, has unlocked additional value across the organization. The platform supports multiple use cases, enabling collaboration between fraud and marketing teams to align strategies based on actionable insights. Learn more about our Ascend Platform

by Zohreen Ismail 4 min read February 18, 2026

For lenders, the job has never been more complex. You’re expected to protect portfolio performance, meet regulatory expectations, and support growth, all while fraud tactics evolve faster than many traditional risk frameworks were designed to handle. One of the biggest challenges of the job? The line between credit loss and fraud loss is increasingly blurred, and misclassified losses can quietly distort portfolio performance. First-party fraud can look like standard credit risk on the surface and synthetic identity fraud can be difficult to identify, allowing both to quietly slip through decisioning models and distort portfolio performance. That’s where fraud risk scores come into play. Used correctly, they don’t replace credit models; they strengthen them. And for credit risk teams under pressure to approve more genuine customers without absorbing unnecessary losses, understanding how fraud risk scores fit into modern decisioning has become essential. What is a fraud risk score (and what isn’t it) At its core, a fraud risk score is designed to assess the likelihood that an applicant or account is associated with fraudulent behavior, not simply whether they can repay credit. That distinction matters. Traditional credit scores evaluate ability to repay based on historical financial behavior. Fraud risk scores focus on intent and risk signals, patterns that suggest an individual may never intend to repay, may be manipulating identity data, or may be building toward coordinated abuse. Fraud risk scores are not: A replacement for credit scoring A blunt tool designed to decline more applicants A one-time checkpoint limited to account opening Instead, they provide an additional lens that helps credit risk teams separate true credit risk from fraud that merely looks like credit loss. How fraud scores augment decisioning Credit models were never built to detect fraud masquerading as legitimate borrowing behavior. Consider common fraud scenarios facing lenders today: First-payment default, where an applicant appears creditworthy but never intends to make an initial payment Bust-out fraud, where an individual builds a strong credit profile over time, then rapidly maxes out available credit before disappearing Synthetic identity fraud, where criminals blend real and fabricated data to create identities that mature slowly and evade traditional checks In all three cases, the applicant may meet credit criteria at the point of decision. Losses can get classified as charge-offs rather than fraud, masking the real source of portfolio degradation. When credit risk teams rely solely on traditional models, the result is often an overly conservative response: tighter credit standards, fewer approvals, and missed growth opportunities. How fraud risk scores complement traditional credit decisioning Fraud risk scores work best when they augment credit decisioning. For credit risk officers, the value lies in precision. Fraud risk scores help identify applicants or accounts where behavior, velocity or identity signals indicate elevated fraud risk — even when credit attributes appear acceptable. When integrated into decisioning strategies, fraud risk scores can: Improve confidence in approvals by isolating high-risk intent early Enable adverse-actionable decisions for first-party fraud, supporting compliance requirements Reduce misclassified credit losses by clearly identifying fraud-driven outcomes Support differentiated treatment strategies rather than blanket declines The goal isn’t to approve fewer customers. It’s to approve the right customers and to decline or treat risk where intent doesn’t align with genuine borrowing behavior. Fraud risk across the credit lifecycle One of the most important shifts for credit risk teams is recognizing that fraud risk is not static. Fraud risk scores can deliver value at multiple stages of the credit lifecycle: Marketing and prescreen: Fraud risk insights help suppress high-risk identities before offers are extended, ensuring marketing dollars are maximized by targeting low risk consumers. Account opening and originations: Real-time fraud risk scoring supports early detection of first-party fraud, synthetic identities, and identity misuse — before losses are booked. Prequalification and instant decisioning: Fraud risk scores can be used to exclude high-risk applicants from offers while maintaining speed and customer experience. Account management and portfolio review: Fraud risk doesn’t end after onboarding. Scores applied in batch or review processes help identify accounts trending toward bust-out behavior or coordinated abuse, informing credit line management and treatment strategies. This lifecycle approach reflects a broader shift: fraud prevention is no longer confined to front-end controls — it’s a continuous risk discipline. What credit risk officers should look for in a fraud risk score Not all fraud risk scores are created equal. When evaluating or deploying them, credit risk officers should prioritize: Lifecycle availability, so fraud risk can be assessed beyond originations Clear distinction between intent and ability to repay, especially for first-party fraud Adverse-action readiness, including explainability and reason codes Regulatory alignment, supporting fair lending and compliance requirements Seamless integration alongside existing credit and decisioning frameworks Increasingly, credit risk teams also value platforms that reduce operational complexity by enabling fraud and credit risk assessment through unified workflows rather than fragmented point solutions. A more strategic approach to fraud and credit risk The most effective credit risk strategies today are not more conservative, they’re more precise. Fraud risk scores give credit risk officers the ability to stop fraud earlier, classify losses accurately and protect portfolio performance without tightening credit across the board. When fraud and credit insights work together, teams can gain a clearer view of risk, stronger decision confidence and more flexibility to support growth. As fraud tactics continue to evolve, the organizations that succeed will be those that can effectively separate fraud from credit loss. Fraud risk scores are no longer a nice-to-have. They’re a foundational tool for modern credit risk strategies. How credit risk teams can operationalize fraud risk scores For credit risk officers, the challenge isn’t just understanding fraud risk, it’s operationalizing it across the credit lifecycle without adding friction, complexity or compliance risk. Rather than treating fraud as a point-in-time decision, credit risk teams should assess fraud risk where it matters most, from acquisition through portfolio management. Fraud risk scores are designed to complement credit decisioning by focusing on intent to repay, helping teams distinguish fraud-driven behavior from traditional credit risk. Key ways Experian supports credit risk teams include: Lifecycle coverage: Experian award-winning fraud risk scores are available across marketing, originations, prequalification, instant decisioning and ongoing account review. This allows organizations to apply consistent fraud strategies beyond account opening. First-party and synthetic identity fraud intelligence: Experian’s fraud risk scoring addresses first-payment default, bust-out behavior and synthetic identity fraud, which are scenarios that often bypass traditional credit models because they initially appear creditworthy. Converged fraud and credit decisioning: By delivering fraud and credit insights together, often through a single integration, Experian can help reduce operational complexity. Credit risk teams can assess fraud and credit risk simultaneously rather than managing disconnected tools and workflows. Precision over conservatism: The emphasis is not on declining more applicants, but on approving more genuine customers by isolating high-risk intent earlier. This precision helps protect portfolio performance without sacrificing growth. For lenders navigating increasing fraud pressure, Experian’s approach reflects a broader shift in the industry: fraud prevention and credit risk management are no longer separate disciplines; they are most effective when aligned. Explore our fraud solutions Contact us

by Julie Lee 4 min read February 18, 2026

Subscribe to our blog

Enter your name and email for the latest updates.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Subscribe to our Experian Insights blog

Don't miss out on the latest industry trends and insights!
Subscribe